F.Q. v. State (4th District Court of Appeals, October 17th, 2012).

Evidence was insufficient to establish juvenile's constructive possession of cannabis, as would support adjudication of juvenile as delinquent for possession of cannabis, in case in which law enforcement officer saw juvenile discard a bag that appeared to contain marijuana, at same time that another juvenile discarded two bags as officer approached both juveniles; State did not offer proof that bag that was admitted into evidence was the same bag that juvenile dropped, and only one of the three discarded bags had been tested for drugs.  Although there was evidence that F.Q. was aware of all the baggies thrown, there was no evidence he exercised dominion and control over the baggie admitted into evidence, and that he knew the baggie contained marijuana.

The Court discussed other cases of contructive possession. Isaac v. State, 730 So.2d 757 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (holding that judgment of acquittal should have been granted after state rested, as the evidence did not establish constructive possession where it showed only that the defendant and another man were passing a baggie of marijuana back and forth, and one of the men dropped it when they noticed an officer was observing them). Compare with Stevens v. State, 782 So.2d 550 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (state proved constructive possession where defendant and other man did not begin passing cigar tube containing crack cocaine back and forth until after they saw deputies, they were both in possession of the cigar tube when it was dropped, and defendant had a large amount of cash on his person when he was arrested, which was organized by denomination, and the deputies testified this was a characteristic of drug dealers).